Jump to content

Landmark Supreme Court cases: Difference between revisions

No edit summary
Line 5: Line 5:
== Short list of Landmark Supreme Court cases ==
== Short list of Landmark Supreme Court cases ==
* cases as generally recommended for minimual study of the AP Gov exam
* cases as generally recommended for minimual study of the AP Gov exam
{| class="wikitable sortable"
|+
!Case
!Date
!Court
!Big Ideas/ Court Doctrine
!Constitutional Issues
!Constitutional Issues
!Issues / Background / Description / Opinion
!Dissent (if relevant)
!Related Cases
|-
|Baker v. Carr
|1961
|Warren
|
* "One person one vote" standard
* Political Question doctrine
|equal protection (14th amendment)
|judicial review
| - held that the state of Tennessee had ignored a 1901 state law that required redistricting to be adjusted according to census results;
the state had not drawn new districts since 1901, resulting in overrepresentation of rural over urban citizens
- the court held that challenges to state districting (gerrymandering) issues were not merely "political questions" and thus subject to Court review
- the Court was split on the case and the case had to be re-argued
| - Justice Brennan argued that redistricting is a political question and should be left up to the states
- Justice Frankfurter held that the decision was "judicial overreach"
|
* Reynolds v. Sims (1964)
* Shaw v. Reno , 1993)
|-
|'''Marbury v. Madison'''
|1803
|Marshall
|Judicial supremacy
|<nowiki>- federalism</nowiki>
- constitutional interpretation by the Court
|affirmed concept of "legal remedy"<ref>Marshall invoked (referenced) the ancient Roman legal maxim ''ubi jus, ibi remedium'' for "where there is a legal right, there is a legal remedy"</ref>
|- settled a dispute between outgoing Adams and incoming Jefferson administrations over Adams' "midnight appointments", including one to Marbury
- ruled that the Judiciary Act of 1793 is illegal under the constitution, thus establishing "judicial review"
- created the power of the Courts to invalidate statutory laws based upon their "constitutionality"
- Marbury lost his case, as the Court ruled that any legal remedy due to him was from an invalid law
|none
|
|-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|}